Re: [PATCH] lto: Don't check obj.found for offload section

2024-09-03 Thread Richard Biener
On Tue, Sep 3, 2024 at 5:44 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 5:50 AM Richard Biener > wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 2:36 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > > > obj.found is the number of LTO symbols. We should include the offload > > > section when it is used by linker even if ther

Re: [PATCH] lto: Don't check obj.found for offload section

2024-09-03 Thread H.J. Lu
On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 5:50 AM Richard Biener wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 2:36 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > obj.found is the number of LTO symbols. We should include the offload > > section when it is used by linker even if there are no LTO symbols. > > OK. > > > PR lto/116361 > >

RE: [PATCH] lto: Don't check obj.found for offload section

2024-08-23 Thread Prathamesh Kulkarni
> -Original Message- > From: H.J. Lu > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2024 6:07 PM > To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org > Cc: Prathamesh Kulkarni ; > richard.guent...@gmail.com > Subject: [PATCH] lto: Don't check obj.found for offload section > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachment

Re: [PATCH] lto: Don't check obj.found for offload section

2024-08-23 Thread Richard Biener
On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 2:36 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > obj.found is the number of LTO symbols. We should include the offload > section when it is used by linker even if there are no LTO symbols. OK. > PR lto/116361 > * lto-plugin.c (claim_file_handler_v2): Don't check obj.found >